To advertise on this site

Poll

Is the Freedom of Information act a benefit and useful tool

Yes
16 (88.9%)
No
1 (5.6%)
Don't Know
0 (0%)
Don't Care
0 (0%)
Undecided
1 (5.6%)

Total Members Voted: 18

Author Topic: Freedom of information act  (Read 14107 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

admin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7410
    • The Marple Website
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #57 on: December 12, 2011, 09:17:24 PM »
Sheila,

The Marple Website Forum is not the right place for your battle with the council. This should be taking place on a Reddish site or you should set up your own. If this is an issue that is important to Reddish people then you should be able to find someone with the skills to help you locally.

I'm sorry but I'm not going to allow you to hi-jack this site for your campaign.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #56 on: December 12, 2011, 09:07:57 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/failure_to_comply_with_bs_10175#comment-16660

In their documents they intended to do a trial pit for contamination near the school entrance.  They didn't own the land so they simply didn't bother (evidence for all I am saying available on request). They claimed to have complied with BS10175 which states they must obtain permission from the owner of the land to investigate it.  Too much trouble, I assume, so they didn't bother to sink that intended contamination pit.

If they don't want questions, then do the job properly.  Simples!

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #55 on: December 12, 2011, 09:05:09 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/memo_from_stockport_councils_env_3#comment-16661

When they were expressing concern at a public inquiry at a sister site, with an almost identical history, of gentoxins being vented with landfill gases, when there no such concern at a site for 550 primary school children and 78 babies?

How were they going to filter out the carcinogenic toxins from the gas at the school site?


The Council shouldn't put kids on a former toxic waste dump if they don't want to be asked questions about the process.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #54 on: December 12, 2011, 09:01:32 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/greater_manchester_geological_un#comment-16667

There are longterm financial implications with respect to building on a still gassing former toxic waste dump - things like ongoing borehole monitoring. I think it perfectly reasonable to have asked if they had taken these issues into consideration. 

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #53 on: December 12, 2011, 08:58:38 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/changing_of_the_fir_tree_nursery#outgoing-114961

They promised a Fir Tree Nursery School. They then reneged on this promise and said they could have a nursery class instead. There was a consultation in which local people made it clear they wanted a nursery school. The Council overrode this. Local people took them to appeal and won.  The Council decided to hold another "consultation" and I use the word loosely, to make sure they got their own way.

Had they not stitched up local people regarding the nursery promise, this question would never have been asked.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #52 on: December 12, 2011, 08:54:30 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/reneged_promise_made_to_planning#outgoing-118334

They promised the diversion of footpath inspector that contamination documentation would be released to me.  It wasn't.  I have witnesses to that statement both in the form of local people present at the hearing and the local reporter.

If they had complied with what they promised, then this question would never have been asked.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #51 on: December 12, 2011, 08:52:17 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/toxic_waste_dump_school_strippin#outgoing-119655

They shouldn't have stripped and stockpiled the contaminated soil before it was analysed.  This is unacceptable.

This question was designed to safeguard the health of the 550 primary school children, 78 babies and staff on the site.  Not vexatious at all.

If they don't want to be questioned they shouldn't have put these kids on toxic waste. Contamination remediation can cost millions of pounds, which is why it isn't done properly.  These kids would be falling sick in 20 years time when these councillors and highly paid council officers would be beyond reach.

It they had to put kids on toxic waste, they should have ensured the remediation was correctly carried out.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #50 on: December 12, 2011, 08:48:22 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/offerton_precinct_the_current_si#outgoing-121441

This is about the dangerous and almost derelict Offerton Precinct.  It could have been developed to a high standard using a local builder with the existing business on board with the plan. The LibDems blocked this and the site is left dangerous and almost derelict.

It is quite reasonable to be asking this question, which I must repeat. What are the local councillors doing about this?  Local people deserve to be served better.

Not a vexatious or timewasting question.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #49 on: December 12, 2011, 08:44:49 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/diane_wilmore_case_implications#incoming-183831

Following the landmark decision in the Diane Willmore case, local authorities are automatically liable when mesiothelioma is contracted in school buildings.  Given this, you would have thought they would have been a bit more careful regarding the brown asbestos - bankrupting the town with damages claims - how much is that going to cost the council taxpayer?  Valid questions.

If they don't want questions, don't try to put kids on unremediated toxic waste.  Why not simply renovate the existing schools?  Fair and reasonable question. Why weren't the councillors asking it?

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #48 on: December 12, 2011, 08:41:26 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/what_action_was_taken_by_smbc_wh#outgoing-135674

What action did the Council take when I reported to them the inadequate removal of brown asbestos including video evidence?  If those kids get sick and the Council is liable, these cases will bankrupt the town.  Surely, given the sensitivity of the site end users, the dangerous nature of brown asbestos and the clear evidence given, some action should have been taken by somebody.

Children's lives - what price them eh?

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #47 on: December 12, 2011, 08:37:07 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/primary_capital_programme_was_pr#comment-20699


As the cost of the school rose from £5.5 million in October 2005 to £7.5 million in December 2005 to £8.6 million in June 2006 to £9.9 million in 2008, which council officers and councillors were keeping track of these  costs which were growing like Topsy and what was the explanation for them?  Absolutely correct that I shouldn't be asking this question - the councillors should have been.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #46 on: December 12, 2011, 08:33:49 PM »

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #45 on: December 12, 2011, 08:32:55 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/footpath_behind_the_toxic_waste_2#comment-21213

The Council has blocked off access to houses on Mill Lane, via a footpath which is locked at both ends with massive gates.  Due to what is presumably a corrupt planning  process in Stockport in the 1980s, these houses were built back to front.  At the diversion of footpath inquiry held on 6th January 2010 local residents explained what it would mean to them to have access to their houses barred.  It would mean, for example, large items of furniture having to be carried circa a quarter of a mile, even if they could throw it over the massive gate, which they can't.  That is bad enough but recently a lady in her 80s collapsed at home. The ambulancemen came but could not get access to her house.  They had to find the one person with a key to this massive metal gate. Fortunately, that person happened to be in.  The ambulance men submitted an incident report. What will happen if that old lady collapses again and they can't gain access or the Fire Brigade can't is anybody's guess.  The councillors and council officers were made aware of these problems repeatedly. They caused the problem - I am asking the question.  I don't think that is vexatious.  I think that is trying to not let a little old lady die because for some unexplicable reason the Council has decided there should be no access to the back, which is really the front, of her house.

If anyone doubts what I am saying I can put them in touch will residents on Mill Lane who will confirm what I am saying.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #44 on: December 12, 2011, 08:24:37 PM »
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/toxic_waste_dump_school_2#comment-21964

Three days before the planning decision making meeting the head of highways admitted the school drop off area was insufficient - he said he had had no idea how big the development was going to be.  I had met him six months before with local residents to point out the ludicrous traffic situation they were causing - he didn't listen.  Now the school is open and local people are having their cars damaged by traffic from the school and are being subjected to double yellow lines outside their homes.  This is causing  great inconvenience to local residents,  as it does around Aquinas.

If the Council don't want the questions, then don't pass a development with inadequate traffic arrangements.  (Documentary evidence available on request).  The councillors should have taken the planning concerns of local people seriously, then this question would never have been asked by me.  They completely ignored the presence of several hundred houses at the end of the very narrow cul de sac on which the school entrance is situation.  Barking mad to have passed that at the planning stage.  If they don't want questions asked, then they should all do their jobs properly in the first place.

Sheilaoliver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: Freedom of information act
« Reply #43 on: December 12, 2011, 08:15:42 PM »
My FOI requests


http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/apparent_financial_irregularity#outgoing-166707

If anyone brings a financial irregularity to the attention of council officers or councillors, under the Fraud and Financial Irregularities policy, they have to look into it.

Agenda Document with reports, Executive meeting 10/3/2008 Agenda
Item 6
Item 6b 3.1 - the area has apparently increased from 2600m2 to
3185m2 and this is to cost an extra £1,050,000.
Item 6b 3.2 the cost per metre 2 is put at £1450.
3185 - 2600 = 585m2 @ £1450 = £848,250 and not £1,050,000.

There may be a simple explanation for this apparent miscalculation of circa £250,000 or there may not.